During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

CCRAA -- Civil Code § 1785.25

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

In Kunwar v. Capital One, N.A., 2017 WL 5991864, at *3–6 (N.D.Cal., 2017), Judge Koh allowed an FCRA claim past the pleading stage based on the argument that reporting a debt that was "cancelled" by issuance of a 1099-C rendered the reporting inaccurate. Plaintiff's complaint alleges that Defendant reported an unpaid balance in Plaintiff's account with Defendant to the CRAs,… Read More

In Huizer v. Wells Fargo Bank, et. al., 2017 WL 2813181, at *3–4 (E.D.Cal., 2017), Judge O'Neill denied a furnisher's motion to dismiss a CCRAA claim grounded in post-bankruptcy credit reporting. This standard is met when a complaint plausibly alleges that a furnisher failed to report a debt as discharged. Venugopal v. Dig. Federal Credit Union, 2013 WL 1283436, at… Read More

In Herrera v. Allianceone Receivable Management, Inc., 2016 WL 7048318, at *8 (S.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Moskowitz granted summary judgment to debt collector on the basis that the debt collector did not know that the information it furnished to a CRA was inaccurate at the time it furnished the information. Defendant moves for summary judgment on this claim, arguing that there is… Read More

In Noori v. Bank of America, here, Judge Andre Birotte granted summary judgment to a bank in an FCRA case.  Judge Birotte found that the Plaintiff produced no evidence that the CRAs ever forwarded a dispute to the furnisher and, accordingly, no FCRA claim could lie. "Plaintiff has produced no evidence that BofA received, from any CRA, a notice of dispute through… Read More

In Mestayer v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc, 2016 WL 631980, at *1 (N.D.Cal., 2016), Judge Chen dismissed a Plaintiff's FCRA/CCRAA claims grounded in credit reporting during bankruptcy proceedings. On or about November 25, 2013, Ms. Mestayer filed for bankruptcy in the Northern District of California. On or about April 20, 2014, she received a bankruptcy discharge. During the bankruptcy proceedings, Ms.… Read More

In Vasquez v. Bank of America, N.A., 2015 WL 7075628, at *3 (N.D.Cal., 2015), Judge Seeborg found a FCRA Plaintiff's claims within the applicable statute of limitations. Federal courts are split on the question of whether each separate notice of dispute triggers a duty to investigate even if the information has been disputed previously. The majority of courts have concluded that “each… Read More

In Lovejoy v. Bank of America, N.A., 2013 WL 3360898 (N.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Ryu found sections 1785.25(b)-(c) of the CCRAA to be pre-empted by FCRA, even though section 1785.25(a) was not.  Plaintiffs argue that these sections not preempted because they are “informal remedies that compliment Section 1785.25(a),” which bars furnishers from re-porting incomplete or inaccurate information. (Pls.' Opp'n 9–10.) The… Read More

In Samuel v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 2013 WL 1501491 (N.D.Cal. 2013), Judge James found no private right of action against furnishers under the CCRAA. Generally, the CCRA allows private plaintiffs to bring an action for damages suffered as a result of violations of the Act. Cal. Civ.Code § 1785.31. However, section 1785.31 only extends to private plaintiffs bringing CCRA claims against… Read More

In Ramirez v. Trans Union, LLC, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2012 WL 4954120 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Corley found no impediment to a Plaintiff maintaining a class action under both FCRA and the CCRAA.  The Action arose from a CRA’s alleged failure to include OFAC alerts in credit reports provided to consumers, even though such OFAC alerts allegedly appeared in consumer reports… Read More

In Mortimer v. Bank of America, N.A., 2013 WL 57856 (N.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Spero rejected a FCRA plaintiff's complaints about a creditor's reporting of his account through and after bankruptcy, but allowed leave to amend as to Plaintiff's CCRAA and UCL claims. Several courts, including two in this district involving closely analogous factual situations, have held that reports, after discharge, of delinquencies… Read More

1 2 3 4